Here is the video of the JPO -AMA webinar on FAA sUAS rulemaking.
The Q&A portion of the webinar was not made available.
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
Here is the video of the JPO -AMA webinar on FAA sUAS rulemaking.
The Q&A portion of the webinar was not made available.
You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!
Comments
I say everybody boycott the AMA as Duane and I have, and start our own association. The AMA is old news, and as it is, really has no place in the hobby any more.
Duane, im sure you didnt have to do much either, to get threatened with a lawsuit. Thats what you get with the AMA, a bunch of whiny 4 year olds who run to mommy every time somebody does something that doesnt fit their ideology.
Thats also the reason I stopped going to club fields, same kind of crap there.
Thanks Eric.
I am an AMA member and have been banned from the AMA forum and every other forum that has AMA members for moderators. I also got threatened with a lawsuit from the AMA to stop "defaming" the AMA. Bunch of dictators and idiots.
Duane, I totally agree with you. The AMA has no reason to be "In Charge". Allowing a single, rather uneducated, biased entity total control would be a death blow to us all.
Quite simply, dont be an AMA member, and dont fly at their sites. Ive personally been against almost everything AMA since I first started flying. I used to be a member but now I refuse. The AMA should be nothing more than a "club" , not a regulating authority.
Also, when the AMA say sUAS, they really mean "Shut Up And Smile"
In the ARC Document they recommend (top of page six) eliminating provisions for recreational flying outside of an FAA recognized Community Based Organization (IE: AMA, there is no other by the AMA and FAA's admitting). They have already banned semi-autonomous flight in the AMA (by thier definition headlock gyros are even banned) and many members are asking to ban cameras on models to "distance ourselves from FPV and AP". The FPV rules still exist but they recently eliminated the use of any autonomous equipment on RC models, yet they allow them on freeflight. Very ambiguous language throughout the AMA rules, another reason I do not want them in charge of anything. They are amateurs and have no clue how to write real regulations.
There is more to the story than in that webinar. Note that the slides they are using are e few years old and the timeline they are using is 100% wrong according to the DOT.
I must have missed something. At which part did they throw FPV and semi-autonomous under the bus?
I did not see anywhere that they mentioned forcing membership of the AMA on anyone in that entire webinar.
They also that the AMA could be one of the groups, not the sole group, but also mentioned that an individual could opt into operating outside of any of the communities(like AMA) and would still have to follow the FAA guidelines though.
Could you please show a screenshot or link to a certain timeframe in the video which mentions any of the points you just mentioned? As I said, I could have missed it.
I find it strange that the AMA is throwing FPV and semi-autonomous under the bus to try and save the handful of mmbers who have turbines and 55+ lb. aircraft (less than 1% of members) . Yet they want to force membership on the parkfliers that didn't need or want them under PPP. I still don't think the AMA understands what they are in for if they get their way with the FAA. I can see a few dozen class-action suits hitting them if they are made the sole "authorizing" CBO. I think the IRS might have to weigh in on the matter as well. "Forced" dues may be considered taxable income among other issues.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next